Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41610784›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2026

Fréchet radiomic distance (FRD): A versatile metric for comparing medical imaging datasets.

Nicholas Konz, Richard Osuala, Preeti Verma, Yuwen Chen, Hanxue Gu, Haoyu Dong, Yaqian Chen, Andrew Marshall, Lidia Garrucho, Kaisar Kushibar and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Nicholas KonzDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: nicholas.konz@duke.edu.
Richard OsualaDepartament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Institute of Machine Learning in Biomedical Imaging, Helmholtz Center Munich, Munich, Germany; School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: richard.osuala@ub.edu.
Preeti VermaDepartament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Yuwen ChenDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: yuwen.chen@duke.edu.
Hanxue GuDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: hanxue.gu@duke.edu.
Haoyu DongDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: haoyu.dong151@duke.edu.
Yaqian ChenDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: yaqian.chen@duke.edu.
Andrew MarshallDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Yale University, CT, USA. Electronic address: andrew.marshall@yale.edu.
Lidia GarruchoDepartament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: lgarrucho@ub.edu.
Kaisar KushibarDepartament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: kaisar.kushibar@ub.edu.
Daniel M LangInstitute of Machine Learning in Biomedical Imaging, Helmholtz Center Munich, Munich, Germany; School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: lang@helmholtz-munich.de.
Gene S KimDepartment of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, USA. Electronic address: sgk4001@med.cornell.edu.
Lars J GrimmDepartment of Radiology, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: lars.grimm@duke.edu.
John M LewinDepartment of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, Yale University, CT, USA. Electronic address: john.lewin@yale.edu.
James S DuncanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Yale University, CT, USA; Department of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, Yale University, CT, USA; Department of Electrical Engineering, Yale University, CT, USA. Electronic address: james.duncan@yale.edu.
Julia A SchnabelInstitute of Machine Learning in Biomedical Imaging, Helmholtz Center Munich, Munich, Germany; School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK. Electronic address: julia.schnabel@tum.de.
Oliver DiazDepartament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Computer Vision Center, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain. Electronic address: oliver.diaz@ub.edu.
Karim LekadirDepartament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: karim.lekadir@ub.edu.
Maciej A MazurowskiDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA; Department of Radiology, Duke University, NC, USA; Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Duke University, NC, USA; Department of Computer Science, Duke University, NC, USA. Electronic address: maciej.mazurowski@duke.edu.

Funding

Harmonization of breast MRI dataR01EB031575 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI MAZUROWSKI, MACIEJ A. · 2022 to 2025
$2.1M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB031575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Determining whether two sets of images belong to the same or different distributions or domains is a crucial task in modern medical image analysis and deep learning; for example, to evaluate the output quality of image generative models. Currently, metrics used for this task either rely on the (potentially biased) choice of some downstream task, such as segmentation, or adopt task-independent perceptual metrics (e.g., Fréchet Inception Distance/FID) from natural imaging, which we show insufficiently capture anatomical features. To this end, we introduce a new perceptual metric tailored for medical images, FRD (Fréchet Radiomic Distance), which utilizes standardized, clinically meaningful, and interpretable image features. We show that FRD is superior to other image distribution metrics for a range of medical imaging applications, including out-of-domain (OOD) detection, the evaluation of image-to-image translation (by correlating more with downstream task performance as well as anatomical consistency and realism), and the evaluation of unconditional image generation. Moreover, FRD offers additional benefits such as stability and computational efficiency at low sample sizes, sensitivity to image corruptions and adversarial attacks, feature interpretability, and correlation with radiologist-perceived image quality. Additionally, we address key gaps in the literature by presenting an extensive framework for the multifaceted evaluation of image similarity metrics in medical imaging-including the first large-scale comparative study of generative models for medical image translation-and release an accessible codebase to facilitate future research. Our results are supported by thorough experiments spanning a variety of datasets, modalities, and downstream tasks, highlighting the broad potential of FRD for medical image analysis.

Indexed as

Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRadiomicsAlgorithmsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingEvaluationGenerative modelsImage similarityImage-to-image translationMetricsOOD detection

Identifiers

PMID41610784
PMCPMC13224392

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.